AlterZgo

I’m sure that may be true to some extent but I’m really basing my opinion on my stage 1 F80 M3. Even with a modest 475 wheel HP, that car is a white knuckle scary AF experience whenever I floor it in 1st and 2nd gear. And this is even with wider 295 width rear tires. People just don’t realize how fast these cars have gotten b/c they drive them w/ traction control on. Turn all the nannie’s off and even my modest M3 slides all over the road. I can’t even begin to imagine what 700 rear wheel HP would be like to drive on the road in a GT500. Actually, I can imagine it by looking at the super poor acceleration numbers that are clearly traction limited = not fun for me.

After experiencing my 992S, if I were getting a G80 M3 it would 100% have to be xDrive. No way I’m getting another 500 hp front engine RWD car b/c I’ve been spoiled by the Porsche. 760 stock HP in a RWD GT500? That’s several hundred HP beyond pointless IMO.

AlterZgo

This car and driver test I read says 3.5 sec 0-60 and 11.3 @ 132 mph 1/4 mi:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

vs this 992 S which did 3.0 sec and 11.3 @ 125 mph:
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...y-the-numbers/

Granted the GT500 is going much faster at the end of the 1/4 mile… which is exactly my point… minimal traction off the line for the GT500… so minimal a Porsche with 317 less HP beats it 0-60 and matches the 1/4 mi time. It’s just no fun IMO to have all that power that cannot even begin to be used effectively.

Tupper

But the Porsche would kill the GT500 on a racetrack, driver skills being equal

Jaye Bass

The C&D article I referenced was a quote that Ford claimed 10.7 in the quarter. C&D did test it at 11.3, which is still not slower than the 992S. Most posters here know about the 911's traction advantage over front engine cars, that's not a secret. The GT500 has a pretty competitive C&D Lighting Lap time at VIR. Regardless of the claims made in this thread it is a serious performance car, not just a burn out machine. I own a base model Carrera so I voted with my pocketbook but I'm not going to slam the GT500 for being what it is not.

Jaye Bass

Looking at C&D's Lightning Lap data the GT500 is about 2.5 seconds a lap quicker than a 991.2 GT3. While they haven't tested a 992 GTS, it is not going to be more than 2.5 seconds quicker than the previous gen GT3.

Your claim doesn't have a whole lot of back up.

991.1 Guy

Don't argue with the Porsche fanboys!

Tupper

^ It's about 7-800 lbs heavier than a Carrera S (non-cabriolet) so that's surprising

Jaye Bass

After reading/watching reviews of the GT500, it was obvious to me that it was a world class performance machine with lots of track capability.

Jaye Bass

I'm a Porsche fanboy but with a modicum of awareness.

JiminyGlick

It should be obvious to anyone with half a brain but you can't change the mind of these old fogeys that drove a fox body back in the day and "oh it whipped around on me" and haven't driven one since and still think all Mustangs are the same

ipse dixit

The GT500 and the 911 GTS are very different animals, but both equally capable.

The GT500, with the V8 Predator engine, has power on tap from the get-go, with the only thing holding it back is perhaps its chassis. And for anyone that thinks the carbon wheels do not make a difference in terms of lap times, acceleration, stopping, basically everything involved in a driving a car, then you probably also think that bigger, lighter brakes make no difference when compared with smaller, heavier brakes.

The 911 is a much more balanced machine and even though it certainly doesn't lack for power, the power and the 911 chassis are much better paired and aligned with one another, with power delivery much more linear and controllable than the Ford.

As great as the 911 is, the Predator just sounds so much better than the flat-6 in the Porsche.

But at the end of the day, both great cars, just very different.

The Ford is like a Grizzly Bear, the Porsche more akin to a cheetah.

Pick your poison I guess.

Quadcammer

The ignorance about the performance metrics of the new mustangs (particularly in the grip/handling front) is pretty astounding in here. It seems like a lot of guys who wouldn't dare be caught getting familiar with hardware from a lowly american company. Those would be the same guys who get their clock cleaned at the track by said mustang and out come the excuses.

Anyway, yes the ford interior will be cheap plastic, yes it will not be as elegant. yes, it is heavier with a forward weight bias. All the while, it turns, stops, and hauls *** like many much more expensive cars. If you can live with the interior/build quality, etc, its certainly worth a look.

dhirm5

I doubt that Ford would be cleaning many clocks on the track. It's too much power flowing through rear wheels w not enough traction. Edmunds has a comparo of the base 911 with the GT500 and the C8. I'm pretty sure the S would be enough to beat this mustang in all the categories, based on their test results.

https://www.edmunds.com/coupe/articl...s-porsche-911/

EDIT: Also, there's this: "During our testing and evaluation, the Shelby emptied its entire tank before the Chevy and the Porsche used the first quarter of their tanks" - lmao

manifold danger

Not all enthusiasts are created equally.

Funny thing is, this thread has delivered on the entertainment front. I agree with the OP's assessment, and I'm pretty tired of coming in here just to see the same 4 or 5 thread topics retreaded ad nauseum. (I keep coming back due to an unhealthy obsession with the 992 in particular though...)

Reality is, the GT500 and many, many other cars are legitimate contenders for the garage spot a 992 would occupy... but I honestly sort of doubt many people would legitimately cross-shop them (myself included). I love the variety though.

Quadcammer

perhaps this might educate you:
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...lightning-lap/

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...lightning-lap/

9....repeat 9 seconds faster. Clock...cleaned.

In fact, look at where the gt500 shows up: